Council on Healthy Mothers and Babies

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421546970
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Dublin, OH, USA
Phone
6145861914
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$27,331
Expenses
$174,301
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUSAN GIVENS (President)
  • DR MARC PARNES (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANGELA SAUSSER SHORT (Exec. Director): $24,499 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promotion of healthy mothers

What it reported doing in 2015

Education and promotion of healthy mothers and babies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -537.7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.4% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.7% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $159K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $24K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.